The Supreme Court today announced its decision in Safford Unified School District v. Redding.
The school district had strip-searched a 13-year-old female student after another female student alleged that she had obtained a prescription-strength ibuprofen from the 13 year-old. The school did not alert the student’s parents or summon police prior to having the school nurse and an administrative assistant require the girl to remove her clothing in a closed office.
The court ruled that the search violated the girl’s rights under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids “unreasonable searches”.
As the Washington Post Reports, the court reported an 8-1 decision, with Justice Clarence Thomas the lone dissenter. Apparently, Justice Thomas would have deferred to the discretion of the school administrators, writing in his dissent that “"Judges are not qualified to second-guess the best manner for maintaining quiet and order in the school environment.“
As far as that statement goes, it’s a platitudinous truism. What judges supposedly are qualified to do is recognize patently unconstitutional actions of low-level bureaucrats when they see it.
Reader Comments:
Where was the Supreme Court when I was searched in high school, 2x? Point is, 10 yrs later another court will come in & say different. Nothing accomplished except maybe a slowdown on Ibuprofen raids the next 10 yrs.
That case was totally outrageous.
They should have put those administrators in jail for child abuse.
Clarence Thomas dissented?
“Platitudinous truism” is far too kind..
Post Your Comments:
